a lot of threads have been kind of derailed lately by this endless debate....
so i thought this thread could be useful.


having x% of ppl thinking "it only means the guy is legit and trustable" and the rest thinking "it means you'll be financially reponsible for the guy" is really likely to end up badly one day or another.....


i have a simple opinion on the subject, wich could easily be a simple solution :


since there are clearly - at least - two widely different interpretations of the expression "to vouch for someone", let's just use two different words, instead of arguing endlessly....


obviously, english isn't my first language, so i have no suggestion to make,
but...


to our best linguists,.... have fun !

I think if someone is using you as a referral, then that means that you two have done some business together in the past and everything went good, so you can consider it as putting out a good word for the guy. I had never fully considered if by vouching someone, I would be financially responsible for any financial losses, but I'm okay with this being the commonly accepted definition. Otherwise we'd have to come up with a new term, and I don't know what that would be then.

That being said, I'm going to let it be known here, that if someone is going to present myself as a vouching for them, then this action is ALWAYS going to require my personal acknowledgement. That is, if I promise to vouch for someone, then the outside party involved with the transfer has to be in contact with me before the transaction goes through, even if it is known that the same guy has successfully used my reputation in the past for similar purposes. I will also absolve myself from the responsibility in case my identity gets stolen on (e.g. on 2p2 or Skype), so it's up to the guy verifying my word to make sure that he is talking to the right person.

I literally would have not known that English isn't your native language.

I think that the easiest thing to do is just to ask the person who's vouching what he or she means by it.

Just be upfront about it and say "Does that mean you're good for the money if this guy doesn't pay?"

Afaic, vouching in the context of financial transactions, especially in the gambling world, definitely implies that you will "make good" on whatever money is at stake if the person you're vouching for doesn't pay, but some disagree with this, so instead of coming up with new terms that people could later on pretend they were confused about or some similar bull****, it's easier just to make it very explicit, imo.

vouching means u'll cover someone if they don't pay. only one interpretation of it

Depends what you are vouching for. You can vouch for someone for a job, that someone is a stand up person, etc.

Generally in the poker world when you vouch for someone, you are going to cover any debt they would have if they didnt pay and disappeared

NoahSD just wrote a blog on this

http://www.nsdpoker.com/2011/08/the-vouching-system/

This, there have been several posts in the staking forum regarding vouching and the fact that it is thrown around way too loosely. Vouching means what is quoted here and should not be used unless this is the intention of the person "vouching" for another.

Nevertheless, people still vouch for other without knowing the real meaning of the word. Basically people say they can "vouch" for someone who is trying to get a stake, when what they really mean is "I know this person, staking them should be okay, but if they screw you I'll be shocked and do nothing about it."

Just try to use the term correctly yourself and if you're going to base any judgements off of someone else saying they "vouch" for someone, make sure that the person who is vouching understands the definition of vouching and intends to use it the way its supposed to be used.

I usually break it down into two things when people ask me to say something out them.

1. Character reference---this is just saying i have done some business in the past and they were legit/i would be surprised if all didnt go smooth

2. Vouch---100% on the hook for the money if that person scams.

like jimmy said, in the staking forum there was a thread where vouching was talked about a lot and it seemed most of the more well known stakers/people who bought pieces thought of vouching as "on the hook" for the money if that person who was vouched for scammed.

This is exactly what the word means to me.

I've always personally made sure to be very careful with using this word. If you just say you've had good interactions with someone and don't want personal responsibility, better to use the word 'reference' instead of 'vouch', imo.

yea exactly, you can always say guy is legit, have done $xxxk in trades etc, but keep the term vouch pure pls...

Yes this. Two months ago I asked Fees about the integrity of a particular person, he was very clear about it: "This guy has been reputable for 3 years and has not been implicated in anything shady, however, I will not be responsible for any money lost".

This was perfect and all I needed to hear, doing it this way, the system works. The only issue is clarifying whether you will be responsible for the person or if you are just making a reference to the person's character.

The question is though, what do we do with people who have previously said they "vouched" for someone when in reality they actually only thought they were making a character reference. Should they be accountable? Should they only be held accountable to some extent?

The more I think about it, people could try to get off by saying "oh I didn't mean vouch" so I guess it should be a very strict thing.

In that case, I think it should be your responsibility to ask what the person means when he or she uses the term, the same way it should be your responsibility to check by calling the person, friends, asking personal questions only you know the answer to, etc....when someone asks you for transfers/stakes/loans, etc...on skype or aim.

It's gotta mean you're on the hook for the money. Saying I vouch for so and so is a strong statement. Also a "voucher" is something you can exchange for compensation.

Few people have already said it in this thread. It should be clear. A vouch means you are on the hook if they end up scamming.

Providing a "reference" for someone means you've done a business deal with them in the past and everything went without a hitch. Seems simple enough.

how is the thread longer than this post?

nobody is going to call you to make sure you think someone is a 'good guy' before they send them a large amount of $$.. the only reason someone is ever asked to vouch in the poker community is to assume responsibility; ergo, only vouch for your responsible, trustworthy friends.

It's up to the reader to figure out how reputable a vouch is or not and what vouching means to that person.

Given there are two applicable definitions of the word in the dictionary, one of which says you're providing surety and one of which says you're providing a reference, it would be unwise to assume the person using the word has chosen the definition you prefer. If you want a surety bond, verify that's what you're getting and don't just assume "I'll vouch for him" is giving you that. When you ask your plumber if he can vouch for the HVAC guy he's recommending, the plumber is not taking on financial responsibility when he says "yeah, sure".

obviously if you vouch you vouch, but it's completely reasonable for someone to ask me about someone i have met a few times, someone i've coached, etc. and i can say "thusfar he's seemed very standup in our dealings and always paid me on time, etc." without saying "yea man, the 3.5 hours i've spent coaching him and those two PMs are certainly enough for me to cover his losses if he scams you in this 20k xfer!"

it's just important to be thorough with your level of trust.

I agree with Tom Dwan's definition, however, the word by itself leaves ambiguity, and today people sometimes use that ambiguity to their advantage It seems unfortunately,more and more a person's word is no longer their bond.

I Play mainly live poker, and I love it. One of the things I have loved about poker is the people, the sense of community. You can leave your chips on the table, and not have to worry about leaving them while you take a walk. You come to trust and enfriend the people in the poker community. We look out for one another.

Everyone knows what vouch means. It shouldn't have to be spelled out. Judging from the plethora of scandals I read about on 2+2 on a daily basis, this just isn't the case. Do people need to draw up legal contracts when they lend someone a tournament entry? Maybe they do, sadly.

One other thing as Tom posted on this site. Despite the tremendous flak he has taken over the whole Full Tilt thing, here is a guy who knows what vouch means. He backs up his words. His promise, which I fully believe he will deliver upon if he has to, to try to help recompense the victims of the Black Friday scandal, shows that there are some people who still know what the right and honorable thing to do is.

this

If ive ever vouched for someone, i will make good on their debt. If i dont have 100k to make good for someone else, I would make that clear of my relationship with that person etc, making it more of a reference.

Vouch surely stems from Voucher no? Which means a statement of collection as far as everyday use go.

If I have a buffet voucher from a casino I turn it in and get my food, if I have a verbal vouch(er) from you and something goes wrong I turn it in and get my money.

Linguistically, I agree. That's what the word means. In practice, it seems like a lot of people don't get it so I'm always careful to be very, very clear. If I'm looking for someone to vouch for someone else on a transaction I explicitly ask "if he doesn't pay, will you assume responsibility?" I think the real lesson here is to always make any financial agreement as explicit as possible. Shorthand like "vouch" can only leadto trouble, especially in a community where many people don't speak English as a first language.

Think this is pretty much spot on.

+1 don't know how anyone else comes to any other conclusion